AVS Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,011 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
KNOW.....I saw the film in theatre, the thing that struck me the first time I saw it was: how uneven the picture quality was from scene to scene. All the digital processing took it's toll, I thought. The film was really grainy in places. It was always conspicuously obvious when there was no digital creatures or features in a scene. Those scenes mostly looked like a major motion picture. The highly processed scenes of Jah Jah or whatever always looked poorly. It was so noticable!


The film print had edge enhancement or what passes as such me thinks. It pays to see some films in the theatre. Everything that's wrong with DVDs and LDs is not caused by the transfering. In our discussions here I hardly ever hear anybody blame weak film-making on the pic problems. I think it's a bigger factor than some folks think. Or, maybe U never or seldom ever thought about that.


SWPM is a purrrr-fect example. George has traded resolution for the infinite possibilities of the virtual. Maybe George delayed SWPM's release in hopes he could figur out a way to tweek the picture up some? Anyway, I'm only suprised that so many people are supprised that SWPM has such a ho-hum pic. Hey, I saw it in the theatre......Best wishes fellow Vulcans!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,082 Posts
I noticed some of the general image differences in the theater too. Most of the film would look good and totally believable and then, BAM, I would see something that just did not look real.


It is kind of funny that this stuff shows up more easily on our home systems than th etheater though, but I guess we di have th eability to watch it over and over.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,007 Posts
I think you're right, Rachael, in that Lucas oversharpened the video image to compensate for softness resulting from all his CGI cartoon gimmicks.


However, he clearly overdid it. NO one can reasonably call this a reference DVD image.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,771 Posts
I saw the trailer for this film when I went to see SUPERMAN last month in New Jersey (an employe put it at the end of the film for fun) and there was no EE. No halos. None of that. Nada. Zip. Zilch.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
392 Posts
I didn't use to regard the presentation in theaters as the way a movie should look because may theaters don't really have a proper setup to achieve optimum quality.


This was also true for the theater I saw TPM in twice, it was in the Kahala Mall Theaters in Honolulu (yeah I know it's not a reference theater but it was near my home and there are always free parkin lots in the evening).:eek:


If you are used to frequent theater with optimum setup your better off of course.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,536 Posts
Hi Rachael


It's an interesting point. But i think that Bjoern's analysis shows that it IS the DVD transfer that did this: The deleted scenes, the trailers etc look better than the movie (less EE etc), so i think that suggests that either they shot the footage for the deleted scenes on a different medium (unlikely, since a lot of it was shot along with the rest of the film) or that the movie was transferred to DVD differently then the deleted scenes and other extras (more likely i think).


Gertjan
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,011 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Well, to be honest, I think the DVD authoring is part of the problem, but not the majority of it Gertjan. I saw it at one of Regal's flagship theatres, it was well-presented. The weak scenes in the film stuck out and they looked like TV movie of the week quality stuff. There is a certain quality we've become accustomed to in theatres, SWPM frequently dipped below that.


I bought the LD when it came out. The LD shares most of the DVD's flaws, but it does have less EE. The colour on the DVD is no better than the LD. Granted, I've used an HLD-X9 & LD-S9 to display the LD. This film always had limitations to how good it could look. The pod race on the supplements shows it could of looked a little better...but only some. The film was shot in Super GrimeVision, seemingly....Best wishes!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,453 Posts
zed3,


They are talking about StarWars The Phantom Menace aka Episode 1.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
263 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by zed3
I read all the responses hoping to find the the tile of movie you were talking about but no luck. I have no idea of what the title is, thanks for keeping me and others completely in the dark.:(
zed3, it's a common practice here to refer to a movie by it's initials, it can be confusing sometimes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,156 Posts
I did see tihis in the theater, but that was SOOOO long ago that I can't remember how it looked in the theater!!! :)


Peace....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,011 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Sorry Zed, I should of put STIR WARZ PHANTOM DENTIST in the post once:p! Best wishes!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,379 Posts
I saw it SWTPM on opening night at The Uptown here in DC (curved screen, 70 MM, etc.). I wasn't too impressed with the picture, but didn't examine it nearly as close as others here.


I sure hope The Lord of The Rings doesn't exhibit this level of unconvincing reality. :(
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
177 Posts
Umm, I haven't seen the trailer on HDNet yet. I'll look for it tomorrow.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,354 Posts
Rachael,


I never thought either TPM looked great even in theater. It lacks that super crisp feeling. And the mixture of film and digitially shot stuff seems uneven.

As for waiting to tweak the image or supply all the bonuses, well, I'more of the marketing-economics school, selling it now with a US market of 20M players is "better" than doing it 18months ago with maybe 7-8M players :D ggggggg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,011 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
Auh, ze marketting angle! I lieke zat! Good point mon ami....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,072 Posts
I wonder what differences or negative effects shooting SWFM straight to digital might have had compared to film. If there were any, then the suggestion that these effects were present in theaters could have merit. I think all our standards are going to fall back on what we think good film should look like. This wasn't -ever- film, except the physical print medium that ran through the projectors. Like taking a 35mm picture of a digital photo.


Anyway, it will be interesting to have another go-round in the theaters when Matrix Reloaded and Attack of the Clones hits theaters. They're both also of the non-film variety.


A buddy of mine got a chance to see SWPM in a special DLP digital theater at TI's facilities in Texas - using digital rather than film. Perhaps by the time these movies are released there could be more digital theaters. It would be interesting to compare this presentation with traditional film presentation.
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top